Here’s the list of 10 things wrong with the economy. Read the article for details on each.
What’s the line from Battlestar Galactica (and Peter Pan, oddly enough): “All of this has happened before and will happen again.”
1. We are learning the wrong lessons from the last one.
2. No one has been punished.
3. The incentives remain crooked.
4. The referees are corrupt.
5. Stocks are skyrocketing again.
6. The derivatives time bomb is bigger than ever — and ticking away.
7. The ancient regime is in the saddle.
8. Ben Bernanke doesn’t understand his job.
9. We are levering up like crazy.
10. The real economy remains in the tank.
At this point, I’d trust the capuchin monkeys who were taught how to use money over any politician or government official of any party. At least they made no pretense about really caring about anything other than getting what they could for themselves and to hell with everyone else.
Ha! Funny that you reference capuchins Uncle Dave. Having read quite a few of these “monkey” papers that came out of the middle part of the 2000’s, you probably wouldn’t be shocked to see how shaky the experimental designs of many of those papers were. Example: females pay more attention to apparent fairness than do the males, so let’s just ignore the males and only report how the females respond to make inferences about how humans may be similar.
Thankfully teaching monkeys to exchange “money” for fruit has lost favor in the experimental economics crowd.
Our government is so disfunctional that they can’t even agree that roads need to be smooth, municipal water needs to be drinkable, the electric grid and wireless infrasctructure needs to function at more than an 80% effectiveness, and cops, firefighters, and teachers are needed period.
No one has been punished – especially the likes of Barny Frank and Chris Dodd who were instrumental in creating the housing market crash.
Why are you laughing at the grave misfortunes this recession has caused to all of us.
Oh, you’re a Republican. It suits you to not wish the country well.
#5: Huh. A Republican. No one has ever accused me of that before. I take that as an insult as bad as calling me a Democrat!
What’s there to do except laugh now that our political & economic system has devolved into something we, the people, have no control over anymore. Doesn’t make one bit of difference who you vote for other than the particulars of how the elected screw us.
Kind of like the Saw movie franchise where just as soon as you think you’ve seen the most diabolical thing, here comes something that’s even worse.
Capuchin monkeys/Uncle Dave 2012
Yeah sure, the shit hole we’re in was not caused by the country’s GOP CEO for 8 years. It the fault of one negro and one homo.
Hey John…what’s the best way to catch up? What email address can I send you a note to?
Hope you are well!
ab
Hey, but we get to watch “Who’s got Talent” and other DRECK ON TV and EAT DEADLY “SNACK FOODS” TILL WE WEIGH 400 POUNDS !!! That’s the PINNACLE OF PROGRESS IN 2011 !!!
@#8 Nothing to do with GOP, negro or homo. Everything to do with Progressives, left or right, white, black, green, gray, pink,…
Progressive mantra of Government over-controlling, social engineering, creating dependent classes and financing all through Keynesian debt is the root. We have had one Dem’ Progressive doing that for 8 years with slight of hand (Clinton got surplus you say? – look at the real numbers, Debt rose every year under his leadership too, just he used clever scheme to rob SS for his claims); we got one Rep’ Progressive doing it for 8 years under the guise of security,… now we have one doing it in open and with throttle at the max.
Progressive ideology is the core of the problem. Give me anti-Progressive in any party or independent who’ll run on the premise “I’ll destroy every Progressive agenda so that it never raises again” and he/she gets my vote. Left or Right, white, negro or purple, straight, gay or trans-gender, married or not, cheating or not, bigamist or polygamist. But no more special classes of people, social engineering, public/private cooperation (PC way to say fascism) or Global Agenda.
#7: If I am elected, I promise to do as much as I can do to do as little as I can. You can take that to the bank! Oh wait. That bank was foreclosed on and is now a carwash. … You can take that to the carwash!
#11 Partial agreement and feel free to direct your lecture to the others in here. First, I’ll be watching your high ground claims now of live and let live.
Second, your broad brush definition of “progressive agenda” is very typical. When things are fucked, you conveniently sweep them under the progressive definition and happily throw in a Bush administration in there to keep your views “pure”.
I consider myself progressive but the notion I want government in my shorts is false. Having said that, there is a place for government. In fact it’s so cool, every place has one.
US economic policy took a turn in the early 80’s and never came back. This mess was a long time in coming. It took 25 years to make this mess, and it will probably take longer to get out.
Politicians are not Economists (or they would be paid twice as much).
Economists (PBS SPECIAL) are retards, and use FANTASY to judge what it SHOULD BE.
Show me Either one of the above that Balances his OWN check book, and is NOT in the red…and I will show you the next president.
Anyone seen the article about a school kid, who did genealogy on the presidents…found almost all of them related..
I dont know about you, but I have checked backgrounds to a few STATE officials…ITS A FAMILY BUSINESS.. its the SAME people in office for over 100 years..
Dumbo = tax and spend.
Puke = deficit and spend.
Both are corrupt, self dealing, and in the pocket of big corporations/private money. This results in:
Dumbo = social safety net/services to the people.
Puke = defunding services to the people and deregulating societal oversight allowing for the greatest wealth inequality ever seen outside of Imperial Rome.
Thinking = comparing and contrasting the similarities and the differences. Weighing the elements, applying a value system, reaching a conclusion. Rinse and Repeat.
Not Thinking = “They are all the same.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gee, after we define the terms and their INTENDED effects, there isn’t much more to say that can’t be seen/felt in our daily lives. That 25 year trend of ruining/gutting America hasn’t stopped yet. So, we have a few more years to go before a consensus forms that we have a Puke Problem, not a Both Sides are Evil Problem before we start to fix the problem.
Of the list provided, I’d say failing to re-regulate is the worst harm and its not even on the list.
Typical.
The Politicians in Spain created their own disaster just as we are creating our own disaster. They had the option of acting in a reasonable and prudent manner just as our nation has had the option of acting in a reasonable and prudent manner and decided not too.
This does not mean that Dobbs and Franks using Freddie and Fanny to make or buy up loans to people that should never have been allowed to borrow that kind of money didn’t act in a criminally negligent manner. You have to be mentally challenged to not understand what is going happen when you insist on making loans that the number crunchers say they can’t pay back!
The guy that wrote the article is as rational as a hamster that got hit by a truck.
#5 No, The choice is to laugh or cry about people like yourself who are either completely out of touch with reality and think that you can bleep business people like crazy and the economy will flourish anyway along with spending oceans of borrowed money or they are so blindly partisan that they will let their party get away with _anything_ no matter how brain dead it is. I bet you even believed Nancey P. when she said on more than one occasion that balancing the budget had always been her first priority.
#17–do-ill==well done. finding the molehill of Dumbo’s to blame in a Mountain of Puke.
Yes, the current recession was brought on by the housing bubble but that was just the spark. The gasoline that got thrown onto the pile was unregulated debt swap instruments. The difference in magnitude between the 2 issues, between spark and gas, is 1 to 100. Focus on the irrelevant as every shill for the Pukes does.
tell us again how the rich create jobs?
It goes past silly to: Evil Hoomans.
#16, bobbo,Please define what you mean by “deregulation” that it is universally bad.
Regulation nearly destroyed the natural gas industry by the early 80s; deregulation efforts are what saved it.
Even events like the 2000 California energy crisis had less to do with the general fact that deregulation occurred than with specific things like the extremely flawed day-ahead energy contract auction scheme the state had implemented, which resulted in runaway contract prices.
Haha, you ask me about my word games and then you insist there is a wall of a difference between deregulation and having them simply changed? If the government removes a regulation that is causing an inefficient market outcome, then the regulations governing that market have been changed; and by removing an existing regulation, they have also deregulated the market.
See how that works champ? Or are you still going to perform semantic gymnastics to validate your “obviously and universally true” position?
Hey Sea Lawyer–you are quite right. There is a wall of difference between deregulate and changing the regulations:
Observe the simple definitions of words:
Deregulate: Remove regulations or restrictions from
Change regulations: from:
Change: The act or instance of making or becoming different
Regulations: A rule or directive made and maintained by an authority
So, yeah–the dictionary tells us that in essence deregulation is the OPPOSITE of changing regulations.
But surely you don’t want to discuss the pyscholinguistics of your epistemological religo-pukeville issue of the day?
Let’s see if I can guess what has your motor running?…………you jumped on my use of the word at post #16: “Puke = defunding services to the people and deregulating societal oversight allowing for the greatest wealth inequality ever seen outside of Imperial Rome.” //// Hmmm—the repeal of Glas-Stegal was an act of deregulation ===regulations were removed. They weren’t changed as you misanthropically imply.
Its telling the amount of confusion you want to throw up in the air. Mislabeling the clear impact you wish to impose by calling it the opposite of what it is. Very puke of you to do. OH!!!! Truly, thats not fair. Very political of you to do.
Sorry.
Deregulation = Universally BAD.
Changing Regulation = Universally required as part and parcel of the always continuing process towards a better future.
Here’s a nice little example of deregulation for you bobbo:
Since the passage of Glass–Steagall, it has been unlawful for federal reserve member banks to pay interest on demand deposit (checking) accounts. This was done purely to eliminate a means of competition between banks. The eventual result was that the banks invented new types of accounts in the 70s (NOW and Money Market) to avoid the regulation.
Well, the Frank-Dodd act of 2010 finally repealed this great example of depression era regulation holdovers.
Oh crap. I meant to add/say:
“Hmmm—the repeal of Glas-Stegal was an act of deregulation ===regulations were removed, AND NOT REPLACED WITH ANYTHING CHANGED. A VACUUM WAS CREATED THAT GOT FILLED WITH AVARICE AND FRAUD. They weren’t changed as you misanthropically imply.”
Thereby emphasizing the importance of “eschewing” deregulation and always stressing the need for changed regulations.
Thank you Sea Lawyer for helping me to clarify my thoughts.
#23–Sea Lawyer==I don’t get your point at all.
What is your point?
If its that regulations must be constantly reviewed and improved as the situation develops and becomes known, then we agree.
If you think an area is RIPE and well known for fraudulent activities that regulations prohibiting same should be repealed—then we disagree.
What do you mean Sea Lawyer?
You are the one playing word games out of your own stubbornness bobbo. I’m simply pointing out that deregulation is an act of changing the set of regulations, which you keep wanting to ignore because it doesn’t suit your previous position.
Anytime the word deregulation is brought up, people like you scream and yell that it’s all just a bunch of robber barons wanting to rape America, especially when you know nothing of the particulars of why removing some poorly conceived, or no longer relevant regulations would be desirable.
Sea Lawyer. Ok. Totally serious mode: use of the term deregulation includes the concept of changing the regulations as well as removing regulations leaving a vacuum.
Review you own honest issues and you will see a sloppy use of the term deregulation when the more accurate term is really changing the regulations.
This word play has serious implications when nefarious interests want to take advantage of those ambiguities.
Language is also a continuous process. We can make both language and politics a more honest and more precise endeavor by choosing our words more carefully than we often do.
But it is all definitional. People should never argue about definitions. Merely state what definition they are using and then let the conversation proceed.
You mean to say: the gas industry made changes in the regulations that were needed. We both agree unless what they actually did was remove all the regulations. DAMN===its still definitional.
something about “lawyers” is niggling the back of my mind. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
Nonetheless–I think no honest person can cite many issue of regulation where they should all be removed with no replacements==that process more precisely being called changing the regulations, not deregulating the situation.
Glas Steagle remaining one of the very best examples of that. And the UNregulated debt swap industry being another. I guess some would aver the debt swap industry ticking away at the heart of the American Society is a form of free market regulation?
We think with words—the very stuff of reality perception.
Fair enough. Normally though, I think of de-regulation/re-regulation in terms of the significant net effect. If more was removed than was amended or added, then the market has been deregulated. In the opposite instance, (re)regulation has occurred. In all of these cases, the rules (regulations) have been changed, which is why I see no value on fixating on that word.
Psycholinguistics.
I dip into it as often as I can stand. Beyond a few introductory ideas, the language gets severely academically obtuse.
but understanding how words shape our perceptions is critical to understanding ourselves.
You may understand your use of the words as you say===but others are using the same words to different ends.
If an industry has 1000 regulations applied against it, and #767 is considered to be “very bad” and in a round of regulations changes #767 is replaced by regulations 1001 thru 1025, has that industry been deregulated?
Terms that are so ambiguous as to allow their opposite clear meaning should be avoided.
Your understanding above is completely a sliding scale based on individual values and assessments. Vague and ambiguous. My understanding and the clear dictionary meaning is more absolute based ((can’t think of the better word right now)) –meaning it starts at zero and counts up.
Words shape how we understand our universe.
Stay thirsty my friends.
Ha, ha. I almost hate to ask but as short version or link as you might have at hand==what was the gas issue and its resolution?
Well, to get back to your earlier mentioning of Glass-Steagall. The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act is clearly something you are characterizing as deregulation, and yet that act wasn’t strictly a removing of regulations – it also added many as well. For example: the act introduced the requirement of financial institutions to provide privacy notices to their customers. So even your definition must be based on the relative net outcome, and not strictly that things were only removed. It has almost never been used to mean just that in any article or discussion I’ve ever read. Maybe by those who don’t know the details and are prone to hyperbole…
So even if the net outcome was that Gramm–Leach–Bliley deregulated the banking industry, which I’m perfectly fine with it being called that, at least it provides more information and a context that is absent from just saying things have changed.
We have a tendency to jump down ratholes, you and I.
Ha, ha. Seriously. Define rathole?
But I am thinking even while not posting.
Deregulate means to me to remove regulations that are needed to maintain safety/sanity all because someone got paid off to do it.
Of course, every instance stands/falls on its own merits…..and the solution among men of good will on finding a disagreement is to keep talking. Not to remove oneself into a protective shell of adamant dogma and political chanting repeated ad naseum. Eg–the current debt ceiling dispute.
If the Pukes think we are spending too much and that the rich keep the economy growing with jobs, jobs, jobs that on its own is a “position”===but all credibility (what little there was) has its pants dropped when the gutting of MediCare and Soc Security is used to fund the continued wealth transfer to the rich in the name of “saving it.”
A deregulation of common sense and what is clearly obvious if you will. Even while 70-80 per cent of voters clearly communicate they can tell shit from shinola. What does this indicate but pure Puke corruption: in the pocket of the Super rich.
The Dumbo’s and Pukes are not “exactly” the same. Silly to think/post as much==covers up/encourages all kinds of silliness and even: evil.
Yea, verily.